Some disagreements with Sonali Ranade’s on Koodankulam

Sonali Ranade made several tweets supporting the go ahead for the Kodankulam plant. I see things differently. This is not to say either of us is right or wrong, but the need for debate (that the government desperately strives to avoid)

I find that the activists have provided far more factual data, statistics and examples than the government. If there is exploitation, I see the activists at least making a stab at transparency and education, unlike the government, so this comment makes no sense to me.

No one actually knows that it shutdown properly. It was declared so by TEPCO and echoed by Japan Government and IAEA. There are spikes in radiation measurement and a video that seems to indicate that reactor 4 was heating well before the Tsunami hit.

There is some evidence that the plant had started leaking radiation immediately after the quake and before the Tsunami hit.

It would be extremely difficult to pinpoint the cause of problems at Fukushima to technical and human error. Evidence points to damage and failure.

To begin with, “a diesel generator” that failed. There were *13* diesel generators at Fukushima. There have been doubts raised as to their quality and if they were functioning at all. 

An interesting debate into the failure of so many diesel generators at once on a forum has many insights and a participant saying…

An unrelated example to illustrate that this is not impossible is that 4 diesel backup generators failed in the US between April and October 2011 – with no Tsunami in sight or any kind of flooding. Three of them in the same plant and same event – North Anna plant post an earthquake in August.

This has rightfully highlighted the need for evaluating the adequacy of emergency systems. However the evaluation has not been done yet and no new protocol or checks are yet in place that could be adopted at Kudankulam (or other plants). 

I don’t know what you mean by that. The reactors had their own cooling. The battery back up died, the diesel backup didn’t work. The cooling system itself had few problems with the possible exception of pipes broken from the earthquake. In fact, the struggle was to get power to them. Or there is something about the crisis I am completely unaware of. Possible. Much has happened.

All the spent fuel pools were on top of the reactors. The problem with the one at Reactor 4 isn’t its location or capacity but that the building has become too weak from the explosions to support it reliably. A new crisis won’t require collapse. A leak that is faster than the capacity to fill water will do it.

This is a big problem. And we are duplicating it. If you see the photos of Kudankulam, they aren’t all that far apart. The danger isn’t only from hydrogen explosions, but the very real risk that a crisis at one may make operating the others impossible due to radiation. There is very real fear that any one of the reactors or pools getting problems enough to make working impossible for humans will be the end of them all (they are still pumping water to cool them and systems aren’t autonomous. Besides, even if they were, radiation waits for a long, long time)

This is a concern. This is also a potential concern for Indian plants. Including the upcoming Koodankulam. Actually, specially for the reactors at Kudankulam, since our current experience doesn’t include this technology and there are no operating reactors to share practical operating knowledge with.

Actually, it was the head of staff taking charge, going against orders and dumping seawater that broke the TEPCO hesitation.

True. It should have been done sooner. But this is not an emergency procedure at all. It was unprecedented and jugaad born in desperation. It is possible they took time to think of this as a possible solution.

True, but I don’t think that was the only reason. Post the explosions, few thought the reactors could be used again. Also, it weakens the reactor, so you have to find a permanent solution that much faster, because the reactor will fail.

TEPCO has much to answer for. Both before and after the accident.

Many things can be repeated in modern reactors. Failure of cooling systems can happen at any plant. The last few months, a plant in California has been reporting unusual wear in its cooling tubes – the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. Initially, Unit 2 was being investigated, people reassured, etc, but now Unit 3 has been shut down after the leak on January 31st 2012, till the problem can be investigated and fixed. 

But there are many others. BARC’s staple response to anything nuclear is to declare it not a concern. The DAE claimed in November 2011 that the total casualties of Fukushima were zero. This was ironic, because my news feed showed the news before that as one of a worker at the plant having been found dead – heart attacks are common deaths for those exposed to radiation. They have risen many times over since the accident in the entire region, and the plant and decontamination works in particular.

I don’t believe that the GoI studies at all. It decides to its own profit, collects information, and selectively uses it to point to what it wants to say. If indeed there was such a report, and if indeed it supported the governments stance, it would have been plastered all over the country by now.